Download as PDF, PPTX
Uploaded byAlessandro Bonifazi
Bonifazi gazzola building climate change adaptive capacity in spatial planning
The document discusses the challenges and opportunities in integrating climate change adaptation into planning and evaluation practices across Europe. It emphasizes the need for strengthening adaptive capacity through spatial governance and highlights the role of various stakeholders, including local governments and private sectors. A comparative case study of Bari and Newcastle is presented to explore emerging adaptation practices and the importance of aligning climate policies with local governance contexts.
More Related Content
Similar to Bonifazi gazzola building climate change adaptive capacity in spatial planning
![City_politics_and_the_environment_g2[1].pptx](https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/citypoliticsandtheenvironmentg21-230314002358-a3126444-thumbnail.jpg?width=640&height=640&fit=bounds)
Bonifazi gazzola building climate change adaptive capacity in spatial planning
- 1. + Evaluation and spatialplanning – in the name of what? Building climate change adaptive capacity across planning domains in Europe Alessandro Bonifazi - Independent researcher/Politecnico di Bari: [email protected] Paola Gazzola - Global Urban Research Unit, School of Architecture, Planning and Landscape, Newcastle University: [email protected] IX International Workshop on Planning and Evaluation Strategies for the Environment: Evaluating and Planning for Extreme Events Mediterranean Agriculture Institute Bari, Valenzano (BA), Italy March 16-17, 2015
- 2. +Focusses come (Climatechange) and go (Sustainable development) in policy agendas (Dryzek, 2005), and frictions arise.... n Opportunity: Climate change mitigation and adaptation policies are expanding the scope of planning and evaluation after decades of declining salience (Albrechts 2004; Davoudi 2012b). n Threat:The creative compromises between economic development and environmental protection that underpinned most sustainability-oriented planning practices are put under pressure by the prescriptive nature of climate change policies (Dryzek, 2005; While et al., 2010) 2
- 3. +Outline n Framing climatechange adaptive capacity n Guiding research questions n Is adaptation about making new/different kinds of plans? n Or,does adaptation rather entail carrying out new/different kinds of evaluations? n Nay,it must be about strengthening adaptive capacity in spatially organized governance processes,mustn’t it? n Reflecting on the role of evaluation in planning for climate change adaptive capacity-building n The way forward n Building adaptive capacity to climate change through planning and evaluation: a conceptual framework n Comparative case study: emerging adaptation practices in planning and evaluation in Bari (Italy) and Newcastle (UK) metropolitan areas n Discussion:Whatever climate change adaptation be about, in the name of what is it driving evaluation in planning? 3
- 4. +Framing climate changeadaptive capacity differentiation vs conceptual stretching n IPCC:“Adaptation is the process of adjustment to actual or expected climate and its effects. In human systems, adaptation seeks to moderate or avoid harm or exploit beneficial opportunities. In some natural systems, human intervention may facilitate adjustment to expected climate and its effects.” (IPCC 2014b: 1251) n EU (EC+EEA): Adaptation needs a mix of options (grey options rely on technology and civil engineering projects; green options make use of nature; and soft options aim at altering human behaviour and styles of governance) and complex governance networks, in terms of vertical (European, national, regional, local) and horizontal (across socio-economic sectors and between regions) policy integration (EEA, 2013) 4
- 5. + n A humanintervention to reduce the sources or enhance the sinks of greenhouse gases (GHGs)...(or) to reduce the sources of other substances (particulate matter, nitrogen oxides, etc.) which may contribute directly or indirectly to limiting climate change (IPCC 2014b: 1266-7). n The measures introduced to avoid irrecoverable or unjustifiable damages, reduce or repair negative impacts, enhance positive effects, offset or compensate for unavoidable losses (Therivel, 2004) Mitigation (Climate change) Mitigation (Impact Assessment) Framing climate change adaptive capacity differentiation vs conceptual stretching 5
- 6. +Framing climate changeadaptive capacity ...based on vulnerability 6
- 7. + 7 n Adaptivecapacity:“The ability of systems, institutions, humans, and other organisms to adjust to potential damage, to take advantage of opportunities, or to respond to consequences” (IPCC 2014b: 1251). n Adaptations are manifestations of adaptive capacity, and they represent ways of reducing vulnerability and/or strengthening resilience (adapted after Smit and Walden, 2006: 286) Framing climate change adaptive capacity
- 8. + n Focus: frombiophysical vulnerability to wider social and economic drivers n Decision-Making Model: incrementalism dominates, irrespective of growing claims that transformative change may be needed n Measures: engineered and technological options are the most commonly adopted, but ecosystem-based, institutional, and social responses are emerging n Social actors: growing awareness does not translate into action (...), local government and the private sector critical to progress, safety nets for the most vulnerable Framing climate change adaptive capacity state-of-the-art in adaptation to climate change (IPCC,2014b: 836-7) 8
- 9. + Is adaptation about makingnew/different kinds of plans?
- 10. A STRONGER, MORE RESILIENT NEWYORK 2007 2013Hurricane Sandy (2012) 10
- 11. + CATEGORY METRIC 2030TARGET FIGURE FOR MOST RECENT YEAR TREND SINCE BASE YEAR HOUSINGAND NEIGHBORHOODS Create homes for almost a million more New Yorkers while making housing and neighborhoods more affordable and sustainable Increase in new housing units since January, 2007 314,000 125,8372 % of new units within a 1/2 mile of transit > 70% 82.7% 1 NEUTRAL Affordable housing units preserved or added (cumulative since 200 165,000 156,3512 PARKSAND PUBLICSPACE Ensure all New Yorkers live within a 10-minute walk of a park % of New Yorkers that live within a 1/4 mile of a park 85% 76.5% 1 Cumulative number of trees planted through Million Trees initiative 1,000,000 834,0151 ENERGY Reduce energy consumption and make our energy systems cleaner and more reliable Greenhouse gas emissions per unit of electrical power (lbs CO2 e/MWh) DECREASE 674.9112 AIRQUALITY Achieve the cleanest air quality of any big U.S. city City ranking in average PM2.5 (3 yr rolling avg) compared to other large U.S. cities #1 (cleanest air) #41 NEUTRAL Change in average PM2.5 (year-on-year % change in 3 yr rolling avg) DECREASE -0.5%1 CLIMATE CHANGE Reduce greenhouse gas emissions by over 30% Increase the resiliency of our communities, natural systems, and infrastructure to climate risks Greenhouse gas emissions (MTCO2 e) DECREASE 30% 3 47,939,030 (19%)2 SOLID WASTE Achieve the cleanest air quality of any big U.S. city Percentage of waste diverted from landfills (includes fill) 75% 52% 1 1 Results are for FY or CY 2013 2 Results are for FY or CY 2012 3 From 2005 levels Not on Track On Track PlaNYC 2007-11 (greener, greater...) 11
- 12. +PlaNYC 2013 (stronger,more resilient...) CATEGORY METRIC COASTAL PROTECTION BUILDINGS Number of buildings implementing Core Flood Resiliency Measures Number of square feet of residential and non-residential buildings implementing Core Flood resiliency measures INSURANCE Percent of residences in 100-year floodplain purchasing flood insurance Average premium paid for National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) policies UTILITIES Percent of electric generation capacity in the 500-year floodplain able to remain online after a 500-year flood Maximum percent of peak load that could be lost due to failure of any one substation Percent of assets at or above their loading limits during peak demand periods Number of miles of cast iron and bare steel gas mains in the 500-year floodplain Percent of steam generation capacity in the 500-year floodplain able to remain online after a 500-year flood LIQUID FUELS Percent of gas stations with quick-connects for generators Percent of regional fuel terminal capacity in the 100-year floodplain hardened against a 100-year flood Percent of regional refining capacity in the 100-year floodplain hardened against a 100-year flood TELECOMMUNICATIONS Number of critical telecommunications facilities implementing Core Flood Resiliency Measures TRANSPORTATION Number of lane-miles reconstructed or resurfaced Percent of New York City transportation assets adapted for climate change resiliency WATER AND WASTEWATER Number of wastewater facilities or assets protected or raised above the 100-year floodplain Number of right-of-way bioswales constructed Number of sewer miles built in areas with no or partial sewers Number of Bluebelt Best Management Practices (BMPs) Percent of water quality samples complying with Surface Water Treatment Rule standard for turbidity SOLID WASTE Number of DSNY facilities protected or raised above the 100-year floodplain HEALTHCARE Percent of hospital beds in 500-year floodplain meeting resiliency standards Percent of beds in nursing homes and adult care facilities in 100-year floodplain meeting resiliency requirements FOOD SUPPLY Number of grocery stores with generators or quick connects for generators Percent of DCAS food procurement backstopped with more resilient distributors PARKS Percent of DPR facilities in Sandy inundation zone upgraded for greater resiliency Number of trees inspected and pruned Federal dollars secured for coastal protection projects Number of buildings with reduced coastal risk due to coastal protection projects Number of cubic yards of beach sand nourishment 12
- 13. +The relationships betweenadaptation plans and other planning domains Department of City Planning Mayor’s Office of Long-Term Planning and Sustainability Mayor’s Office of Recovery and Resiliency PlaNYC 2007-11 PlaNYC 2013 Sustainability indicators Resilience metrics Annual Progress Report 2014 Within PlaNYC Beyond PlaNYC 13
- 14. +First wave ofclimate adaptation plans is found to be... ...wanting in many respects: n lagging behind mitigation policy n poorly appreciating diversity in local governance contexts n resembling climate impact assessment, and disregarding implementation n disintegrated from existing policies (Preston et al.2012; Stone et al.2012) 14
- 15. +First wave ofclimate adaptation plans is found to be... ...not ready to deliver adaptation (Preston et al.2012) 15
- 16. + Adaptation Policy Cycle(EEA,2013) 16
- 17. + Adaptation Policy adoptionin EU (EEA,2013) 17
- 18. + Adaptation Policy adoptionand diffusion in EU (EEA,2013) 18
- 19. +Is adaptation aboutmaking new/different kinds of plans? n IPCC’s latest recommendations (AR5) address spatial planning mainly for mitigation, and urban areas because highly vulnerable (physical density of people and built environment) and key adaptation drivers (relational,cognitive and social intensity in urban dynamics) n Adaptation in Nature conservation and environmental risk planning = re-labelling (to further legitimize) or amendments to existing plans (Archie et al., 2012; Runhaar et al., 2012) n Diffusion of adaptation within municipal planning is meeting with similar problems than earlier innovations, but leadership (also from within the ranks) and accommodating competing priorities are key to advancing the global/local interplay in climate policy (Measham et al., 2011) Adaptation in different planning domains 19
- 20. +Is adaptation aboutmaking new/different kinds of plans? n Spatial planning potential in climate change adaptation is great: n (alleged) long-term perspective n coordination role - transport, regional development, land use, biodiversity, industry, tourism, energy, water, risks, etc. n wide scope, from strategic to operational levels n Achievements are very limited yet: n poor institutionalization (at legislative, administrative and practice level) n perceived barriers are the same as in other policy fields (resources, knowledge, leadership) n promising opportunities depend on planners’ ownership of adaptation and could build on experts and authorities’ networks Adaptation in spatial planning 20
- 21. + Or,does adaptation rather entail carryingout new/ different kinds of evaluations?
- 22. +Adaptive capacity assessment,based on the ESPON CLIMATE 2013 Programme framework (Juhola and Kruse, 2015)pt Strateg Glob Change (2015) 20:99–120 107 22
- 23.
- 24. Regional Assessment DeterminantsDimensions Determinants Alpine Tourism Educational commitment Knowledge and awareness AWARENESS Knowledge and awareness Problem awareness; attitudes to climate change Computer skills Access to information Attitudes towards climate change Knowledge gaps/missing information Resources of technology Technology ABILITY Demand for further education/training Capacity to undertake research Technology Capacity for research and development Patents Transport Infrastructure Infrastructure Natural assets/ attractiveness of natural env. Water exploitation Cultural assets/ attractiveness of heritage Hospital (beds and doctors) Government effectiveness Institutions ACTION Institutions Structure of tourism sector Democracy Regional cooperation National adaptation strategies Income per capita Economic resources Economic resources Diversity of sector Long term unemployment Capacity for innovation Age dependency ratio
- 25. +Sustainability Appraisal ofLondon’s Climate Change Adaptation Strategy 2010 - Summary of the findings on flooding policy February 2010 SA Report Part B: Appraisal Table 19: Summary of appraisal findings – flooding Sustainability Appraisal Objectives 1.Governance 2.Educationand Awareness 3.HealthandWell-being 4.EqualityandDiversity 5.SafetyandSecurity 6.LiveabilityandPlace 7.Accessibilityand Availability 8.Landscape,Historic andCultural Environment 9.Biodiversity 10.AirQuality 11.ClimateChange40 12.WaterQualityand WaterResources41 13WasteManagement 14Economy Impacts of climate change in London (predicted effects of climate change on sustainability without the draft Strategy but with existing / planned adaptation i.e. Business as usual alternative) Medium-term (2020s) + +/++ - - -/0 -/0 - -/0 -? 0? - -? - - -/+ -? Long-term (2050+) + ++? --? -/--? --? -/--? --? -/--? --? -? --? --? -? --? -? --? Impacts of the Draft Strategy in isolation (predicted effects on sustainability of the draft Strategy as an initial framework for adaptation) Medium-term (2020s) +/++ + 0/+ 0/+ + -/+ 0/+ -/+ -/+ 0 -/0 + 0/-/+ 0/+ + 0/+? Long-term (2050+) +? 0/+ 0/+ 0/+ 0/+ -/+ 0/+ -/+ -/+? 0 - + 0/-/+ + + 0/+? Impacts of climate change in London with the draft Strategy (predicted effects of climate change on sustainability with the draft Strategy and existing / planned adaptation) Medium-term (2020s) +/++ +/++ - - 0/+ -/0 - -/0 -? 0? - -? - - +/0 -? Long-term (2050+) +/++? ++? --? -/--? --? -/--? --? -/--? --? -? --? --? -? --? -/0 --? Key to effects: Major positive: ++ Minor positive: + Neutral: 0 Minor negative: - Major negative: - - Uncertain:? Mixed: -/+ 6.35 Policy 1 and associated actions 1 – 9 are predicted to have generally positive effects on the 25
- 26. +Sustainability Appraisal ofLondon’s Climate Change Adaptation Strategy 2010 – What difference does it make? February 2010 SA Report Part B: Appraisal Element of draft Strategy Key changes resulting from the Sustainability Appraisal process communities added. Actions Encouragement to cover all the dimensions of the Prevent, Prepare, Respond, Recover adaptation framework in the actions which led to several additions. Comments and recommendations led to the amendment and addition of some specific actions, such as: o Inclusion of an action seeking the development of community flood plans / emergency plans. o The inclusion of an action relating to water neutrality under policy 2. o Addition of text referring to regular review of the Mayor’s Water Strategy under Policy 2. Cross-cutting actions included in the draft Strategy were not included in previous drafts. Some of these address issues raised by the SA, in particular: Action 32 relating to the role of the insurance industry in adaptation. Action 31 encouraging businesses and the private sector to take climate change into account in risk management and planning. Action 33 relating to the role of TfL and importance of the need for adaptation action related to infrastructure. 26
- 27. +European Commission Guidanceon Integrating Climate Change and Biodiversity into Strategic Environmental Assessment (2013) 27
- 28. +European Commission Guidanceon Integrating Climate Change and Biodiversity into Strategic Environmental Assessment (2013): examples of alternatives and mitigation measures related to adaptation Encourage car sharing Prioritise high density urban PPs (smaller housing at higher density) and reuse of brownfie land GHG emissions from energy production Generic recommendations are intentionally not provided as these are context-specific, depending upon the energy production capacity and energy supply sources of the area in question Potential synergies between adaptation and GHG reduction Forests and biodiversity Investment in wetlands to support carbon sequestration to offset PP's GHG emissions. Table 12: Examples of alternatives and mitigation measures related to climate change adaptation Main concerns related to: Examples of alternatives and/or mitigation measures at the assessment stage Heat waves Avoid development patterns that fragment habitat corridors or, for linear infrastructures, make sure that habitat continuity is restored in the most sensitive areas Improvements in urban structure — expansion of green areas, open water surfaces and wind paths (along rivers and waterfronts) in urban areas to reduce the possible heat island effect Encourage greater use of green roofs Reduce man-made exhausts during heat waves (industries, and car traffic) Awareness-raising about risks associated with heat waves and action to reduce them Heat wave early warning systems and response plans Potential synergies between adaptation and GHG reduction Droughts Encourage water efficiency measures Explore efficient use/re-use of rainwater and grey water Restrictions on excessive/non-essential use water use during droughts (depending on their severity) Minimise low flow withdrawals Restrictions for effluent discharges into water bodies during droughts Maintain and improve the resilience of watersheds and aquatic ecosystems by implementing practices that protect, maintain, and restore watershed processes and services 28
- 29. + Nay,adaptation must be about strengthening adaptivecapacity in spatially organized governance processes,mustn’t it?
- 30. + Anticipatory Governance n developinga range of possible scenarios – none of which can serve all planning purposes n shaping very flexible adaptation strategies n collapsing monitoring and action in a flow of reflective practices the need for longer-term perspectives and persistent uncertainties calls for (Fuerth, 2009; Quay, 2010): 30
- 31. + Anticipatory Governance n openstrategies (focussed on preserving future options) n contingency plans, to respond to specific scenarios (including the worst ones) n no-regrets strategies (near-term actions with minimal losses if discontinued) Anticipatory governance echoes strategic planning, with its stress on robust actions (Khakee, 1998) ... would entail creating flexible action packages (Fuerth, 2009; Quay, 2010: 31
- 32. +Anticipatory Governance: flexibleadaptation pathways for Thames Estuary 2100 32
- 33. +Anticipatory Governance: incrementalvs transformative change in action-learning cycles 33
- 34. +Reflecting on therole of evaluation in planning for climate change adaptive capacity-building n Climate change policy bringing about more planning and further diversified evaluation n No really “new” concepts yet, but rather a push towards incrementalism (“muddling through”) and strategic approaches n Three fascinating research perspectives: n longer and twisted planning timelines (flexible pathways) n growing attention to social, cultural and political contexts in shaping adaptation policy adoption, diffusion and mobility n harnessing evaluation “bridging potential” in highly fragmented planning landscapes 34
- 35. +Reflecting on therole of evaluation in planning for climate change adaptive capacity-building n Climate change within a broader shift towards the “risk society” (Beck, 1999) n The social construction of Nature is shifting (Davoudi, 2014) from an asset and a context for development (sustainability), to a threat to society (climate risk) n Cf. PlaNYC, 2007 (137):“The sobering images of Hurricane Katrina still haunt us - a testament to our vulnerability in the face of nature’s ferocity” 35
- 36. + Thank you! Alessandro Bonifazi- Independent researcher/ Politecnico di Bari: [email protected] Paola Gazzola - Global Urban Research Unit, School of Architecture, Planning and Landscape, Newcastle University: [email protected] 35